MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index
 FAQ & Terms of UseFAQ & Terms Of Use   Wiggler RadioMW Radio   Muff Wiggler TwitterTwitter   Support the site @ PatreonPatreon 
 SearchSearch   RegisterSign up   Log inLog in 
WIGGLING 'LITE' IN GUEST MODE

feedback on IIIC-inspired planned setup
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules  
Author feedback on IIIC-inspired planned setup
echoes_of_wind
I’m trying to put together a 5U Moog IIIC-inspired system that can give me 2-3 independent voices or sometimes 3 voices sharing parts etc. Something that I can also play "live" with sequencers -- basically have a couple “related” sequences going and also solo something over the top. I’m thinking of going with Synth-werk for voicing and Moon for sequencing.

First, I’d appreciate any feedback on the rack itself. Is there anything important I’ve left out, especially in terms of convenience or the live aspect? I don’t want to get myself in a situation where working with this system would be overly awkward.

Also some more specific questions:

1. I’m planning to go with 901’s but worry about tracking and temp sensitivity. what exactly are the problems with tracking and are they showstoppers? Is the tracking very nonlinear for instance?

2. I haven’t included the dual trigger delays. How useful are these really? Is there anything I’m missing out on in not being able to make DADSR or more complex envelopes? Or is there some other use for trigger delay that is cool?

3. I haven’t included the Moog switch/routing modules, in part because they’re not available from these manufacturers... but I don’t fully understand their function/purpose

I’m talking first about the 993 Trigger and Envelope voltages:
https://modularsynthesis.com/moog/993/993.htm

and second, the left part of the Moog CP3, labeled “Control Voltages”: with switches 1,2,3,4 — again where do these voltages come from and how do they get routed? is it like one for each 901 bank? Are there four sources and one destination (I guess pre-normaled?), and do the voltages get summed if more than one switch is on?

rack image [Note: the blank spaces are meant to be filled with Synth-Werk reversible attenuators but they aren't yet on modulargrid]



Any advice is much appreciated? I've tried posting this elsewhere with no response.. hopefully some Moog experts here wink
JohnLRice
Just a couple thoughts, mainly on the sequencing aspects.

Are you always going to be getting master clock via MIDI? If not think about what you might want to use as an analog master clock. You can of course drive the divider module from the 568 or 569 sequencers, but I find it's more versatile to use a separate LFO, preferably with variable pulse width, to drive the 554 divider.

Also, there is some quirkiness with the 554 where changing a channel on the fly resets that channel but not the others so it can put the channel you changed somewhat out of sync. While this can lead to really cool rhythms etc, it might not be what you want. Using a switch between the divider and sequencers can solve this where you get your clock divisions set how you want them and then route them with an external switch. Your 564 sequential switch would work for this but if you plan on using the 564 for routing 569 row CVs to your VCOs you might consider using something like the 591 switch? Here's a demo I did for this technique, it makes for a very playable setup:


Regarding the Moog routing modules, Moon makes the custom 590 series and you can contact Moon directly to discuss your needs and get prices etc. They aren't listed on the Moon site but you can download the catalog from the site and they are in there: Here's part of the page:

synthetic
Have you looked at the GRP R24 for sequencing? That seems so far beyond what anyone else is doing right now with all of the clock division, built-in quantizing, ratcheting, and memories. It's my next purchase. (Wanna buy a Rhodes?)
josaka
just as a side note.. you can link up to 7 SW 901s or 921 per each A module..
the grp seq is a pretty good option.. if you must have a sequencer in the rack.
personally I dont understand that smile
JohnLRice
josaka wrote:
the grp seq is a pretty good option.. if you must have a sequencer in the rack. personally I dont understand that smile
hmmm..... Don't you mean the other way around? A rack full of sequencer modules and then just a poly synth for the voices? hihi

synthetic
Does anyone have a recording example of 4+ SW 901Bs in unison? I can't quite picture what that would sound like.
josaka
I have 4.. I would say a fourth has less impact as opposed to when you add a 3rd.. having said that it does add.. an extra sub or hi or just an extra for size and thickness.. I will add a fifth osc at some point before brexit happens.. to match the 5 SW 921 ( and a bode ring)

JohnLRice wrote:
josaka wrote:
the grp seq is a pretty good option.. if you must have a sequencer in the rack. personally I dont understand that smile
hmmm..... Don't you mean the other way around? A rack full of sequencer modules and then just a poly synth for the voices? hihi



smile nutter..

I find pretty much all hardware sequencers to rigid sounding after the swing and offsetting note lenths + bends and note dragging humanisation you can do in digital.. in seconds.. and it doesnt cost 1k+ smile smile ..I have hardware sequencers a Korg SQ-1 and 2x Zaquencers if I feel the urge... I tend to record the ZAQ output and then re-sequence the sequence in the computer..

PS those perfourmers do sound lovely.. illogically musical smile (also a good example of 4 oscillators(albeit voices))

this guys eeeks some nice sounds/sequences out of them..
echoes_of_wind
JohnLRice wrote:


Your 564 sequential switch would work for this but if you plan on using the 564 for routing 569 row CVs to your VCOs you might consider using something like the 591 switch? Here's a demo I did for this technique, it makes for a very playable setup:



Thanks this is very cool! Really like what you're doing here. I think I will definitely replace 564 w/ 591, since I already plan for an octal divider.

JohnLRice wrote:
Regarding the Moog routing modules, Moon makes the custom 590 series


also very cool. What i most want to do with routing is be able to stop/start/mute different sequences and parts.. programmably if possible... there may be already enough in the various sequencing options to do this... it's more the idea of building up an entire composition w/o re-patching. I guess this is the holy grail for everyone. I see seb do some of this in his videos, with smaller systems. I'm still vague on this and have to do a lot more thinking about what I actually want. But I do like the idea of swapping voices/osc banks.

synthetic wrote:
Does anyone have a recording example of 4+ SW 901Bs in unison? I can't quite picture what that would sound like.


my plan is not so much to get a fat unison sound, but to derive multiple independent mixes from octaves, fifths and so on, put them through different filters/VCAs and then delay one voice... so I could see more than 3 oscillators being useful here. anyway, maybe I do lean more to 2x5 rather than 3x3.

josaka wrote:
the grp seq is a pretty good option.. if you must have a sequencer in the rack.
personally I dont understand that smile


grp definitely looks cool. i've done a lot of "composing" in my head thinking about the moon setup tho.

somehow if I have just one instrument and everything's organically related i think i will get better musical results. to have one musical "cell" and generate all kinds of variations, delay some of them externally, then add some drone or straight improvised melody on top... this is the purpose and challenge, to get everything consolidated. (i'm not talking about FX, i'm still used to those being external.) so yes, as much in the rack as I can, unless it becomes too big and I can't reach stuff easily. that's the plan.

thanks so much for the feedback, a lot to think about so far! swapping 564 for 591 is a go, probably 2x5 osc banks... lots more thinking to do!
JohnLRice
echoes_of_wind wrote:
2. I haven’t included the dual trigger delays. How useful are these really? Is there anything I’m missing out on in not being able to make DADSR or more complex envelopes? Or is there some other use for trigger delay that is cool?
I forgot to answer this question. It may just be me me and some lack of understanding of when, where, how to use them but every time I try something with a trigger or gate delay, what I thought might work doesn't. I really WANT to like them so at some point I'll need to spend some quality time with them? I think part of the problem is timing and I keep expecting the delays to be "smarter" then they are becuase if you set too long of a time and another trigger happens before the delayed trigger comes out the circuit is reset so nothing comes out. I guess in a perfect world I'd want a trigger/gate recorder with variable delay. I have the Moon quad gate delay and the COTK dual trigger delay and also a couple different eurorack modules that process and delay triggers/gates/clocks so one of these days I'll figure it out! hihi

One module you should definitely try to squeeze into your system is the 569ESB. It will give you the ability to SET (force/jump) the rows of the 569 to any step using an external gate etc. The 569EGB is also great but not as essential since you can get by with the 569's own internal gate bus. The 569ESB is 'essential' because sometimes to get things sync'd up it works better to reset all the rows to step 8 instead of using the reset inputs on the 569 the force all rows to step 1. The 569ESB has all 4 inputs normal'd to input 1 so you can easily reset all rows to the same step, or different steps, with just one input signal.

In case you haven't seen it I have a YouTube playlist titled "M569 Control Yourself" where I explore ways to get the most out of the 569 while using no or minimal external modules:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pAMy0e5izI&list=PL0y5yg9b8JyKsyN5XOOI Vbz5cQC9HvI1g
Synthoholic
Echoes,
My setup is a hybrid of a IIIc and 55 in p cabs with a third in-progress additive voice and sequencing in a dotcom cab.

One thing that you might want to consider is a bank of Mos-Lab 921abbb. These would be preferable over the Synth-Werk because they do full sync and they also have switches that disconnect them from the drivers. Likewise, you might want to consider the 921 in place of the triple-width 901. You will lose the ability to mix your waveforms but you gain the aux out. You might want a second one of these as well.

You might also want to forego the reverb module for an external reverb of some kind.

You could probably also do without the SW Bode 6401 as well.

I think these suggestions give you 4 new empty spaces to consider.




josaka
I have both SW921 X5 and ML921 X3.. (swapped away my full ML 921 osc..)
(the full 921 had a nicer sound than the ML ABBB bank.)

the ML have different power connectors (so you need an extra power board(not a big deal) the sync was not hard on the original moog(PPL) but it is fun to have the hard sync option as well.. I dont often reach for the ML over the SW has to be said..

oddly.. I am considering getting a bode and one last 901 before brexit..smile

https://www.facebook.com/566683136718483/videos/2192425944125685/

echoes_of_wind
josaka wrote:
the sync was not hard on the original moog(PPL) but it is fun to have the hard sync option as well.. I dont often reach for the ML over the SW has to be said..


are there any examples of the ML 921 hard sync about? I tried searching on youtube but so far no luck...

I guess my other problem is in the 901 v. 921 examples I keep going back to the 901, the sine/triangle have to my ears some even harmonics distortion, whereas with 921 the waveforms sound more "correct" but less musical.
noddyspuncture
JohnLRice wrote:
echoes_of_wind wrote:
2. I haven’t included the dual trigger delays. How useful are these really? Is there anything I’m missing out on in not being able to make DADSR or more complex envelopes? Or is there some other use for trigger delay that is cool?
I forgot to answer this question. It may just be me me and some lack of understanding of when, where, how to use them but every time I try something with a trigger or gate delay, what I thought might work doesn't.


I use my dual trigger delay live for some of my ELP tribute patches. One is the delayed pitch spread effect in 'Tocatta' along with which I also use the second delay channel to introduce an audio rate square wave modulation to get the 'ring-mod' effect he later introduced when they played it live. Another is for a delayed vibrato in 'Pirates'. smile
JohnLRice
noddyspuncture wrote:
JohnLRice wrote:
echoes_of_wind wrote:
2. I haven’t included the dual trigger delays. How useful are these really? Is there anything I’m missing out on in not being able to make DADSR or more complex envelopes? Or is there some other use for trigger delay that is cool?
I forgot to answer this question. It may just be me me and some lack of understanding of when, where, how to use them but every time I try something with a trigger or gate delay, what I thought might work doesn't.


I use my dual trigger delay live for some of my ELP tribute patches. One is the delayed pitch spread effect in 'Tocatta' along with which I also use the second delay channel to introduce an audio rate square wave modulation to get the 'ring-mod' effect he later introduced when they played it live. Another is for a delayed vibrato in 'Pirates'. smile
Thanks for the suggestions! thumbs up
josaka
echoes_of_wind wrote:
josaka wrote:
the sync was not hard on the original moog(PPL) but it is fun to have the hard sync option as well.. I dont often reach for the ML over the SW has to be said..


are there any examples of the ML 921 hard sync about? I tried searching on youtube but so far no luck...

I guess my other problem is in the 901 v. 921 examples I keep going back to the 901, the sine/triangle have to my ears some even harmonics distortion, whereas with 921 the waveforms sound more "correct" but less musical.


yep.. the 901 are a nicer sound(patch dependent) the highs are less hard if you like.. but.. the 921 are more electronic and have a load more potential sound options.. yet still get pretty close to the 901(the SW ones at least) with PWM -FM-Synch less drift.. (not much drift in the SW901 has to be said) ..

@ 3:20 the sound of the single oscillator 921B is a good guide.. start stacking them and !!


not the best example.. but this with everything 3 osc hard sync PWM and cross mod FM (was going for a 259 growl type sound smile )
echoes_of_wind
OK.. i think I have converged upon something. I just think i'm gonna stick with 901s because that's where my heart is, if i ever decide to put together a second system (LOL) i'll probably base it around moslab and 921's.

thanks everyone for super helpful comments + example videos!

Synthoholic
Echoes,
There is a Mos-lab 921 sync demo being made for you.

Do you really think that you need four 901bs on a driver though? Three is really excessive. Whenever I have tried to patch unisons with more than three it is so ridiculous. Maybe you can make a better use of space there.

Also consider moving your ringmod and reverb close to your matrix mixer so you can use the matrix to send right to those modifiers.

What cabs are you planning on using? If that is an inductor based 914 then you will need to keep that as well as the transformers of the 6401 pretty far away from the power supply because I got tons of noise from mine and little help from Gerhard to get them fixed. I still have yet to mail that cab to a real Moog engineer to fix that.
echoes_of_wind
Synthoholic wrote:
Echoes,
There is a Mos-lab 921 sync demo being made for you.


Wow, thanks!

Synthoholic wrote:

Do you really think that you need four 901bs on a driver though? Three is really excessive. Whenever I have tried to patch unisons with more than three it is so ridiculous. Maybe you can make a better use of space there.


well I do sometimes like to use 3 oscillators in minimoog patches... not always but sometimes, I like the effect of bringing a sub in.

but the main thought is to derive more than one voice from a single oscillator bank and delay them with respect to one another (through an external audio delay).

so I would use radically different mixes, like two of the oscillators for one voice and two for the other (or 3x1) different waveforms, process them in different ways. these are just thoughts though, I never know how I will actually use a system until I have the system.

(and sure I could do this with the same CV controlling multiple banks, but then there's the additional problem of making sure they're exactly in tune.)

Synthoholic wrote:

Also consider moving your ringmod and reverb close to your matrix mixer so you can use the matrix to send right to those modifiers.

What cabs are you planning on using? If that is an inductor based 914 then you will need to keep that as well as the transformers of the 6401 pretty far away from the power supply because I got tons of noise from mine and little help from Gerhard to get them fixed. I still have yet to mail that cab to a real Moog engineer to fix that.


Thanks! I'm actually not sure about the power stuff, I was going to ask Gerhard but yeah I will try to move the 6401 closer to the 914 I guess.
MUFF WIGGLER Forum Index -> 5U Format Modules  
Page 1 of 1
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group